Oct. 12th

 

Dr. Gilkey,

 

At your request, I am sending you feedback on the proposed General Education Module.  As an Articulation Specialist and an Academic Advisor, I would like to share some of my thoughts (and the thoughts of some of my fellow colleagues) regarding this proposed module.

 

First, I would like to state that I think the concept of a General Education Module is a very good idea and I support the idea in principle.  My concerns are the following:

 

  1. The language of the proposed module is ambiguous. Suggesting that a student fulfill their general education requirements with a module that would be accepted with any participating institution in higher education, but that there will be add-ons is confusing and frankly puts us right back to the Direct Transfer model.
  2. When using the term “general education requirements”, for most counselors and advisors, we are clear that that means the Arts and Letters (humanities), Social Sciences and Science requirements needed for their general education piece of their degree requirements.  We know that that does not include the math, writing, multicultural, B.A. and B.S. requirements and foreign language admission requirements.  If we are all using the same terminology to describe what is required of students, it will reduce confusion a great deal.
  3. The new suggested module should be very straightforward and clear so that there will be a seamless transition from college to college for the student.  Having a module with add-ons that vary from institution to institution will not be seamless.
  4. Currently the OUS institutions and many of the private institutions accept the AAOT degree as a whole.  Since this is already accepted, it seems to me that the simplest, most-straight forward approach is to take what is already accepted and just cut out the health and the electives. Leaving the writing, math and general education pieces in tact.  That would be the most convenient and seamless transition possible for students.  We would have a 55 credit plan which could be accomplished in four terms (if all students started at college level).

 

Again, trying to do this with add-ons for each institution is redundant.  We already have articulated “direct Transfer” plans in place.  I encourage everyone to embrace this idea of accepting a “General Education” module that is accepted as an entirety across the board with no add-ons.  Remember that this has nothing to do with Major requirements, BA/BS requirements or the multicultural requirements.  This idea is a great idea but it needs to be unconditionally accepted for all participating institutions.

 

Thank you,

Shirley Lukacs

Academic Advisor

Lane community College